(1/767) U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of AmBisome (liposomal amphotericin B) for treatment of visceral leishmaniasis.
In August 1997, AmBisome (liposomal amphotericin B, Nexstar, San Dimas, CA) was the first drug approved for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The growing recognition of emerging and reemerging infections warrants that safe and effective agents to treat such infections be readily available in the United States. The following discussion of the data submitted in support of the New Drug Application for AmBisome for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis shows the breadth of data from clinical trials that can be appropriate to support approval for drugs to treat tropical diseases. (+info)
(2/767) Modernizing the FDA: an incremental revolution.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for protecting consumers from unsafe or ineffective drugs and medical devices. The agency's role is defined by a growing and increasingly complex set of statutes, which reflect Congress's desires, on the one hand, to prevent product hazards and, on the other, to expedite FDA review and approval of promising new medical technologies. Congress's latest attempt to calibrate regulation to achieve these goals, the 1997 Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, endorses certain of the FDA's own innovations and changes in the agency's ways of doing business. (+info)
(3/767) When is a cost-effectiveness claim valid? How much should the FDA care?
Federal law requires the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate the promotional claims of prescription drugs and certain devices. Standards of evidence for claims of safety and therapeutic efficacy are rigorous because inappropriate product use may place human life at risk. However, equally demanding criteria for claims of cost-effectiveness of marketed technologies seem to be unnecessary because the consequence of error is principally a bad buy rather than patient harm. Concern exists about the validity of cost-effectiveness studies, the potential for bias, standards for the conduct of cost-effectiveness research, and the needs of managed care. The FDA should moderate its role in regulating cost-effectiveness claims of drugs and devices. This would foster information flow to healthcare providers and insurers and protect the FDA concern regarding false or misleading claims of effectiveness. Although the issues are applicable to both devices and drugs, we draw mainly from the field of pharmacoeconomics because this is where most of the policy has developed. (+info)
(4/767) Generic drug product equivalence: current status.
This activity is designed for healthcare professionals involved in the selection of multisource drug products. GOAL: To understand the basis for approval of generic drug products by the Food and Drug Administration. OBJECTIVES: 1. Identify the criteria employed by the Food and Drug Administration to approve generic drug products. 2. Discuss controversial issues that have been raised relative to generic drug products. 3. Identify narrow therapeutic index drugs. 4. Describe the different types of bioequivalence studies that are required by the Food and Drug Administration. 5. Discuss the responsibilities underlying the selection of multisource drug products by healthcare professionals. (+info)
(5/767) Unlicensed and off label drug use in neonates.
AIM: To determine the extent of use of drugs that are either not licensed (unlicensed), or are outside the terms of their product licence (off label) in a neonatal intensive care unit. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted over 13 weeks. RESULTS: 455 prescription episodes were administered to 70 babies. 63 (90%) patients were given a drug that was either unlicensed or used in an off label way. 54.7% prescription episodes were off label, many for more than one reason, and 9.9% (45) were unlicensed; 35.4% (161) prescription episodes were licensed. CONCLUSION: The use of unlicensed and off label drugs in neonatal intensive care seems to be far greater than other paediatric settings. This highlights the difficulties faced by those trying to ensure safe and effective prescribing for neonates. Urgent action is required to resolve this situation. (+info)
(6/767) Status of new medicines approved by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency regarding paediatric use.
AIMS: To evaluate the activity of the European Medicines Evaluation Agency with regard to the registration for paediatric use of new medicines granted a marketing authorization. METHODS: European Public Assessment Reports published on the Internet from January 95 until April 98 have been analysed using the browser Microsoft Explorer and the software Adobe Acrobat Reader. RESULTS: Of the 45 new substances licensed since January 95, 29 (64%) were of possible use in children but only 10 were licensed for paediatric use. For the 19 drugs of possible use in children, but not approved for such a use, in nine instances (47%) their summary of product characteristics reported that their use in children has not been established. CONCLUSIONS: A change of practice by pharmaceutical companies and regulatory authorities is imperative so that children are not precluded from having the same rights to medicines as adults. (+info)
(7/767) Fear of black market means no RU-486 for Canada until US approves drug.
Mifepristone, the "abortion pill" that is better known as RU-486, is no closer to arriving in Canada than it was 8 years ago. But that fact hasn't slowed debate about the product. (+info)
(8/767) Development of orphan vaccines: an industry perspective.
The development of vaccines against rare emerging infectious diseases is hampered by many disincentives. In the face of growing in-house expenditures associated with research and development projects in a complex legal and regulatory environment, most pharmaceutical companies prioritize their projects and streamline their product portfolio. Nevertheless, for humanitarian reasons, there is a need to develop niche vaccines for rare diseases not preventable or curable by other means. The U.S. Orphan Drug Act of 1983 and a similar proposal from the European Commission (currently under legislative approval) provide financial and practical incentives for the research and development of drugs to treat rare diseases. In addition, updated epidemiologic information from experts in the field of emerging diseases; increased disease awareness among health professionals, patients, and the general public; a list of priority vaccines; emergence of a dedicated organization with strong leadership; and the long-term pharmacoeconomic viability of orphan products will be key factors in overcoming the complexity of orphan status and the limited need for vaccine. (+info)